Battsknox wrote:I really don't care about SecuRom for any other reason, so I don't join the fight, but I support you guys who do

Well can't hold that against you

I've also had zero techical problems with securom, so far. but i refer you to JPFrostfox's post above for the reasons why I oppose it and support the lawsuit. Particularly this:

JPFrostfox wrote:It also sets some scary precedents on what a company can install in addition to the product you purchased, without any notification or confirmation that you are willing to install it. That's probably one part that may prove to be the legal thorn bush.

I can only hope that the lawsuit scares EA enough for them to remove the Securom....im not getting my hopes up.

princeofice wrote:I can only hope that the lawsuit scares EA enough for them to remove the Securom....im not getting my hopes up.

Not to be rude to any extent, but I actually believe the contrary...

Cheers,
Roboraptor

Roboraptor wrote:http://www.courthousenews.com/2008/09/23/_Spore_Hijacks_Computers_Class_Claims.htm

Thought you all would be interested in this. Personally, I see this as one step forward to removing the Digital Rights Management software we have on our computers.

Thoughts?

Cheers,
Roboraptor

I just have to say that this is stupid. I don't support DRM in any way, but that so-called lawsuit is so full of you know what that it hasn't got a chance. SecuROM has been around a long time and can be found in many games. It is really not much different from any other DRM. It's meant to prevent copying the game and it does about as good of a job as possible. Yes, it was cracked... they all are. But for those who don't know how to obtain the cracks, it does what it is intended to do. Obviously, any DRM is going to be at least somewhat invasive because it has to be able to prevent easily bypassing the protection. It does not, however, harm your computer in any common use of it. It is nothing like StarForce, which is actually damaging. The idea that it cannot easily be removed is wrong. There are utilities freely downloadable to do just that (though your game won't work after unless you reinstall it with the DRM or else you use a crack). And it wouldn't matter if they did tell you the DRM used was SecuROM instead of just saying that it uses copy protection software. People wouldn't read it anyhow and they'd install it even if they did read it. Think of all the people uses AOL's software (not AIM, but the actual AOL software). That stuff is more damaging to your computer by far than SecuROM could ever be said to be. And people STILL use it.

These kinds of lawsuits are just made by people who want to try to make some extra money by throwing in a lawsuit against a big company with lots of money who they believe will be more willing to just settle the suit rather than take the time and money to go to court over it. Check out all of the similar lawsuits being filed for other really stupid reasons. Part of why the courts aren't working as well as they should in the US is because of all of these stupid lawsuits being filed just so people can make a quick buck and taking time and resources away from the real cases.

It's like that case years back where the lady sued McDonalds just because her coffee was hot and she burned herself on it. Um... coffee is usually hot. Since then, the cases where people sue companies because they did something stupid have been on a steady rise. Why do you think we see warning labels stating the obvious (like not to use an iron while taking a bath)? It's because some stupid person actually did that and either they or their family sued the company over it just to make some easy money. It's out of control and continues to ruin the courts. Supporting such cases isn't going to help you or anyone else.

riamus wrote:

Roboraptor wrote:http://www.courthousenews.com/2008/09/23/_Spore_Hijacks_Computers_Class_Claims.htm

Thought you all would be interested in this. Personally, I see this as one step forward to removing the Digital Rights Management software we have on our computers.

Thoughts?

Cheers,
Roboraptor

I just have to say that this is stupid. I don't support DRM in any way, but that so-called lawsuit is so full of you know what that it hasn't got a chance. SecuROM has been around a long time and can be found in many games. It is really not much different from any other DRM. It's meant to prevent copying the game and it does about as good of a job as possible. Yes, it was cracked... they all are. But for those who don't know how to obtain the cracks, it does what it is intended to do. Obviously, any DRM is going to be at least somewhat invasive because it has to be able to prevent easily bypassing the protection. It does not, however, harm your computer in any common use of it. It is nothing like StarForce, which is actually damaging. The idea that it cannot easily be removed is wrong. There are utilities freely downloadable to do just that (though your game won't work after unless you reinstall it with the DRM or else you use a crack). And it wouldn't matter if they did tell you the DRM used was SecuROM instead of just saying that it uses copy protection software. People wouldn't read it anyhow and they'd install it even if they did read it. Think of all the people uses AOL's software (not AIM, but the actual AOL software). That stuff is more damaging to your computer by far than SecuROM could ever be said to be. And people STILL use it.

These kinds of lawsuits are just made by people who want to try to make some extra money by throwing in a lawsuit against a big company with lots of money who they believe will be more willing to just settle the suit rather than take the time and money to go to court over it. Check out all of the similar lawsuits being filed for other really stupid reasons. Part of why the courts aren't working as well as they should in the US is because of all of these stupid lawsuits being filed just so people can make a quick buck and taking time and resources away from the real cases.

It's like that case years back where the lady sued McDonalds just because her coffee was hot and she burned herself on it. Um... coffee is usually hot. Since then, the cases where people sue companies because they did something stupid have been on a steady rise. Why do you think we see warning labels stating the obvious (like not to use an iron while taking a bath)? It's because some stupid person actually did that and either they or their family sued the company over it just to make some easy money. It's out of control and continues to ruin the courts. Supporting such cases isn't going to help you or anyone else.

Thanks for your input. Great to see another opinion on this issue.

Cheers,
Roboraptor

*slaps forehead* EA... do you really have to follow in Sony's footsteps?

Koroniii wrote:*slaps forehead* EA... do you really have to follow in Sony's footsteps?

For the Copy Right Protection Policies, or?

Cheers,
Roboraptor

roboraptor wrote:

Koroniii wrote:*slaps forehead* EA... do you really have to follow in Sony's footsteps?

For the Copy Right Protection Policies, or?

Cheers,
Roboraptor

Probably in the forgetting you aren't the only option thing and then start to die in the competitive market.

Anyone else hear that Blue - Ray is struggling? Just another wonderful thing for Sony to deal with .

I still support HD-DVD.

any updates on when will the case be scheduled?

I'm very please that this case is going through. Installing software that the consumer is unaware of along with the the software they ARE aware of is illegal. Comcast got nailed for this when they put in the packet killer onto peoples' computers to limit bandwidth for Bit-Torrent style sharing. Don't matter if it's legit (like some of Blizzard's and other company's stuff), or not. And burring it in the EULA and phrasing it all cloak-and-dagger like is ALSO a no-no. I hope this case nails EA to the wall, because they overstepped their boundaries. Whether or not it can be removed or not is not, in my mind, the key issue. Them pulling the same trick that hackers pull to install a virus into my system (that is, installing hidden software I was unaware of) is a a big, big no-no. Frankly, I'm considering demanding my money back from them, as well as software to eliminate the software I didn't pay for.

Here's just a random thought since I've actually looked at all 36 pages of the complaint filed.

Can Ms. Thorne seek a lawsuit under CLRA? The CLRA is a law passed by the State of California to protect the citizens of California. Ms. Thorne is a resident of the state of Maryland.

Another question: Was Ms. Thorne directly affected by SecuROM? No where in the complaint states she was affected by it. Only allegations I could find is Amazon.com testimonies.

I wouldn't think so. It specifically states citizen, right? Words such as that can really bar people from certain privileges.

The most angry thing is that people who bought the game now have SecuROM installed on the computer, while so many people who pirated don't.

The idea that it cannot easily be removed is wrong. There are utilities freely downloadable to do just that (though your game won't work after unless you reinstall it with the DRM or else you use a crack)

And this is OK? I should need to look for a utility to remove a program I never asked for and the consequences are now that I can no longer play the game I paid for without looking for a crack and praying EA doesn't see fit to ban my account for "beating the system?"

That's no good! as Sonic Sez.